[whatwg] Throwing in my support for <picture> into the mix
mikko.rantalainen at peda.net
Thu May 17 23:57:43 PDT 2012
2012-05-16 18:01 Europe/Helsinki: Julian Reschke:
> On 2012-05-16 16:36, Glenn Maynard wrote:
>> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:16 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de
>> <mailto:julian.reschke at gmx.de>> wrote:
>> Actually, the key point is that this is non-conforming to start
>> with: image candidate strings must have at least one descriptor
> My point being that the syntax is fragile unless implementations follow
> the spec word by word. I know they are supposed to, but the way it's
> introduced *will* make people split the attribute value by ",".
HTML5 parser is also fragile unless implementations follow the spec. It
doesn't make much sense to spec anything in HTML5 if you cannot trust
the browser vendors to read it. In addition, if some vendor does not
follow the spec, it's *very* easy to point that out. This situation is
very unlike the old HTML versions that left way too much unspecified and
almost any behavior was acceptable by the spec for many corner cases.
The spec is pretty clear for the implementors so the only issue should
be if content authors can deal with the syntax. Also remember that the
current spec tries to make it very clear that the UA is free to choose
any of the available images as used no matter what the content author
says (however, it does recommend the spec to be followed).
More information about the whatwg